Mixed Bundling in Two-Sided Markets in the Presence of Installed Base Effects

References

• Adams WJ, Yellen JL. Commodity bundling and the burden of monopoly. Quart. J. Econom. (1976) 90(3):475–498Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amelio A, Jullien B. Tying and freebies in two-sided markets. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2012) 30(5):436–446Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arellano M, Bond S. Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev. Econom. Stud. (1991) 58(2):277–297Crossref, Google Scholar
• Armstrong M. Competition in two-sided markets. RAND J. Econom. (2006) 37(3):668–691Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bakos Y, Brynjolfsson E. Bundling information goods: Pricing, profits, and efficiency. Management Sci. (1999) 45(12):1613–1630Link, Google Scholar
• Caillaud B, Jullien B. Chicken and egg: Competition among intermediation service providers. RAND J. Econom. (2003) 34(2):309–328Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carrillo JD, Tan G. Platform competition: The role of multi-homing and complementors. (2006) . Working Paper 06-30, NET Institute. http://www.netinst.org/Tan.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Chevalier JA, Kashyap AK, Rossi PE. Why don't prices rise during periods of peak demand? evidence from scanner data. Amer. Econom. Rev. (2003) 93(1):15–37Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi JP. Tying in two-sided markets with multi-homing. J. Indust. Econom. (2010) 58(3):607–626Crossref, Google Scholar
• Derdenger T, Kumar V. The dynamic effects of bundling as a product strategy. (2013) . Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University, PittsburghLink, Google Scholar
• Electronic Arts (2010) . 2010 Annual report, 10K report. Accessed February 26, 2013, http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/712515/000095013010001579/d10k.htmGoogle Scholar
• Hagiu A. Pricing and commitment by two-sided platforms. RAND J. Econom. (2006) 37(3):720–737Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heckman JJ, Robb R. Alternative methods for evaluating the impact of interventions: An overview. J. Econometrics (1985) 30(1–2):239–267Crossref, Google Scholar
• Imbens GW. Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: A review. Rev. Econom. Statist. (2004) 86(1):4–29Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaiser U. The effects of website provision on the demand for German women's magazines. (2002) . NBER Working Paper 8806, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MACrossref, Google Scholar
• Kaiser U, Wright J. Price structure in two-sided markets: Evidence from the magazine industry. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2006) 24(1):1–28Crossref, Google Scholar
• McAfee RP, McMillan J, Whinston MD. Multiproduct monopoly, commodity bundling, and correlation of values. Quart. J. Econom. (1989) 104(2):371–383Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meza S, Sudhir K. Pass-through timing. Quant. Marketing Econom. (2006) 4:351–382Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nalebuff B. Bundling as an entry barrier. Quart. J. Econom. (2004) 119(1):159–187Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paul F. Nintendo cuts royalty rates to woo game developers. (2003) . 2011 Annual report, 10K report. Accessed February 26, 2013, http://news.excite.com/tech/article/id/317481|technology|04-10-2003::16:04|reuters.htmlGoogle Scholar
• Rochet JC, Tirole J. Platform competition in two-sided markets. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. (2003) 1(4):990–1029Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rochet JC, Tirole J. Two-sided markets: A progress report. RAND J. Econom. (2006) 37(3):645–667Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rochet JC, Tirole J. Tying in two-sided markets and the honor all cards rule. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2008) 26(6):1333–1347Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rysman M. Competition between networks: A study of the market for yellow pages. Rev. Econom. Stud. (2004) 71(2):483–512Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmalensee R. Gaussian demand and commodity bundling. J. Bus. (1984) 57(1):S211–S230Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmalensee R. Payment systems and interchange fees. J. Indust. Econom. (2002) 50(2):103–122Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stigler GJ. United States v. Loew's Inc.: A note on block-booking. Supreme Court Rev. (1963) 1963:152–157Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sudhir K, Chintagunta PK, Kadiyali V. Time-varying competition. Marketing Sci. (2005) 24(1):96–109Link, Google Scholar
• THQ (2011) . 2011 Annual report, 10K report. Accessed February 26, 2013, http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/865570/000086557011000019/thqi10k03312011.htmGoogle Scholar
• Venkatesh R, Kamakura W. Optimal bundling and pricing under a monopoly: Contrasting complements and substitutes from independently valued products. J. Bus. (2003) 76(2):211–231Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatesh R, Mahajan V, Rao VR. The design and pricing of bundles: A review of normative guidelines and practical approaches. Handbook of Pricing Research Marketing (2009) (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK) 232–257Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weyl EG. A price theory of multi-sided platforms. Amer. Econom. Rev. (2010) 100(4):1642–1672Crossref, Google Scholar
• Whinston MD. Tying, foreclosure, and exclusion. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1990) 80(4):837–859Google Scholar